Key Post Bitcoin is a clearly identifiable economic bubble

[Duke of Marmalade]

@tecate for the third time, do you agree with $90bn man, who you kindly introduced me to, that bitcoin will be the World reserve currency after the US$ whose time to be retired is coming soon?
This is a summary of his arguments.
1. Time for US$ to go, it's been around too long.
2. Chinese Yuan is the natural successor except it is Chinese (ah dear, neighbourly antagonism is not restricted to where I igrew up)
3. Bitcoin is yer only man.

 

[tecate]

No, I am a heretic against the True Faith. I'm probably in the pay of the NWO or MSM.

@tecate for the third time, do you agree with $90bn man that bitcoin will be the World reserve currency after the US$. This is a summary of his arguments.
1. Time for US$ to go, it's been around too long.
2. Chinese Yuan is the natural successor except it is Chinese
3. Bitcoin is yer only man.

And here we have two fine examples of narrative building and misrepresentation. On the first one, the guy takes a reasonable assertion and tries to pass it off as if its the Inquisition via smug, derisory commentary, bolting on more fiction with a follow up sentence. Will you be making up any more stuff that adds nothing to the discussion at hand today - or are you all done?
As for you Duke, we both know that this (in the way that you've bastardised it) is not what Ruchir Sharma said.

 

[time to plan]

And here we have two fine examples of narrative building and misrepresentation. On the first one, the guy takes a reasonable assertion and tries to pass it off as if its the Inquisition via smug, derisory commentary, bolting on more fiction with a follow up sentence. Will you be making up any more stuff that adds nothing to the discussion at hand today - or are you all done?
As for you Duke, we both know that this (in the way that you've bastardised it) is not what Ruchir Sharma said.

And now we see the poor persecuted victim.

 

[tecate]

And now we see the poor persecuted victim.

No. What we see is more narrative building and misrepresentation - with a strong serving of delusion and wishful thinking. So I'll pose the question a second time. Will you be making up any more stuff that adds nothing to the discussion at hand today - or are you all done? Because my interest is in the topic - not what you're going on with.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

As for you Duke, we both know that this (in the way that you've bastardised it) is not what Ruchir Sharma said.

That was not the original link.
The relevant bit is about 80% the way through.
My shorthand isn't great but this is as faithful a transcription as I could manage:

Down through the ages we have had changes in the international reserve currency. Before the US$ the £. Before that the French currency, before that the Spanish.
They last about 100 years. There is always something around the corner.
Unusually there is no alternative today. The Chinese currency would be the natural successor but nobody trusts the Chinese government.
So a window of opportunity opens for bitcoin.
It will need to make gains as a transactional currency before it replaces the US$ as the World's reserve currency.
I think it will achieve that.

As usual you don't give a str8 answer but I take it that, like me, you do not agree with $90bn man.

 

[jasdpace@gmail.]

jas I can assure you that our bromance has ended

Phew! Now that's a relief. For a moment there, I was afraid that my crypto entertainment and education was about to come to a brutal end. At that dark time, I could envisage you two boys ultimately ending up tagging each other with vegan recipes or something. So happy that normal service seems to have been well and truly restored!

 

[tecate]

That was not the original link.
The relevant bit is about 80% the way through.
My shorthand isn't great but this is as faithful a transcription as I could manage:

I think that the guy seems to be making a lot of sense.

On Bitcoin, he said that the idea is good, the bubble and speculative end hasn't been helpful but the idea remains good. 2 year bear market recovery required. He makes the comparison with how Amazon rose (with incredible volatility) - and thinks that Bitcoin can follow a similar path, emerging as a much more stable asset in 3-5 years; further use case adoption being a matter of time.

That all seems reasonable to me.

On the USD as reserve currency, he refers to this article he wrote in the FT a year ago on the subject. Since 2020, I've heard various commentators (and more often than not, people in finance but not in crypto) speculate that the USD is done as regards reserve currency. His view seems to fit in with that. Lots of countries are getting p-ed off with the system. Especially right now - imagine how squeezed countries are - if oil price has skyrocketed, oil is priced in dollars - then dollar has shot up in price. The Russians wanted out from under the USD as reserve currency before the war - now that the US has simply confiscated their USD funds, they're even less likely to want to touch the USD. Furthermore, people can say what they like about who is the culprit for the current war - but that stunt (swiping a country's sovereign USD reserves) is a complete breach of trust - and Russia is not going to be the only country disturbed by that.

He's saying the same as others have before him - there's no clear successor. US dominance is waning but not to the extent that the Chinese become top dog. Back at Bretton Woods, the proposal was for Special Drawing Rights. That's being talked about again - but by all accounts it has its drawbacks.


And as regards Bitcoin as reserve currency, well it is neutral so there's that. However, I'd imagine Bitcoin is years away from being a real contender. If it becomes a trillion dollar asset, then maybe it will seem like a more worthy contender. And in fairness to Sharma, I don't think he's suggesting that it could fulfil that role any time soon either. He's just saying that if it continues in its development, its a possibility - given that there is a vacancy.

 

[time to plan]

No. What we see is more narrative building and misrepresentation - with a strong serving of delusion and wishful thinking. So I'll pose the question a second time. Will you be making up any more stuff that adds nothing to the discussion at hand today - or are you all done? Because my interest is in the topic - not what you're going on with.

There is a false premise to your dishonset question. Maybe you should return to your childish comments about 'big jobs'.

 

[tecate]

There is a false premise to your dishonset question. Maybe you should return to your childish comments about 'big jobs'.

Nothing dishonest in the question - quite the opposite. Nothing derisory or smug in the 'big job' mention - it was an analogy related to the topic (which is where I believe the focus should be).

 

[time to plan]

I disagree. And an analogy can still be a childish comment

 

[tecate]

I disagree.

That's wonderful - we can now file that away under mutual disagreement.

And an analogy can still be a childish comment

You can and very much should interpret information as you see it (but in this instance too, when it comes to your conclusion, that ends in mutual disagreement). And as I said, the analogy pertained to the topic (which is where the focus should be).

 

[time to plan]

That's wonderful - we can now file that away under mutual disagreement.


You can and very much should interpret information as you see it (but in this instance too, when it comes to your conclusion, that ends in mutual disagreement). And as I said, the analogy pertained to the topic (which is where the focus should be).

So do you agree with me that it was childish to talk about 'doing big jobs' within that context?

 

[tecate]

So do you agree with me that it was childish to talk about 'doing big jobs' within that context?

Asked and answered -> (but in this instance too, when it comes to your conclusion, that ends in mutual disagreement).

 

[time to plan]

Asked and answered. (but in this instance too, when it comes to your conclusion, that ends in mutual disagreement).

I can't see your answer so indulge me please. I'll pose the question a second time. Do you agree with me that it was childish to talk about 'doing big jobs' within that context

 

[Firefly]

'Everything' about Bitcoin and its ecosystem has grown exponentially. I take the development of the tech such that it goes from 7 transactions/sec. to 1 million/sec. as part of that exponential development when it comes to payments. I take going from no payments to going to " to be part of that exponential development.

I don't question the growth. I am questioning your assertion of exponential growth. What is the growth factor for the increase in payments?

Also, you say that there are "considerably more payments" ... do you have any link / data supporting this?

 

[tecate]

I don't question the growth. I am questioning your assertion of exponential growth. What is the growth factor for the increase in payments?

Also, you say that there are "considerably more payments" ... do you have any link / data supporting this?

No problem - well lets address that. On reflection, I accept "exponential" is rash - so let me replace that with "significant". Data below - bearing in mind - that in 2018 and 2019, LN was not a workable network. Even right now, there are improvements required - albeit that it is a functioning network. Anyone can put that to the test by installing a Muun Wallet (following setup, click on 'receive' -> 'lighting' - and copy and paste that address into a DM and I'll send you a few sats - so you can see the speed and cost of transaction). These graphs represent a network that has started from ground zero only a short while ago.

Beyond the data, I've provided my own experiential feedback - and in those examples provided, I'm confident they wouldn't have been possibilities in 2018. If we're to accept that as we move on from here, year on year, more and more people are going to be walking around with digital wallets in their pockets, then it becomes easier to understand that they're that much more likely to have BTC available to spend. I didn't walk around on a daily basis with BTC ready to spend up until the last couple of years because there was no lightning network and main net payments were cumbersome. I do now. One mobile phone or dare I say it 'fax machine' was useless in the world. Their utility rose exponentially as more found their way into the hands of more people. Gen Z'ers are digitally native - and with that they're going to embrace tokens and digital wallets with much more ease than the generations before them.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

As for you Duke, we both know that this (in the way that you've bastardised it) is not what Ruchir Sharma said.

In what way did I b*st*rdise what $90bn man said?
Anyway you now finally admit that you agree with him that bitcoin has a good chance to be the world's next reserve currency. With the leaders of 3 billion people calling it an utterly worthless make-believe and everybody else in authority (except Bukele and whatever dude is in charge of the CAR) saying it has a very good chance of going to zero, that is one heck of an act of faith, on a par with any other cults' fantasies.

 

[tecate]

you now finally admit

finally admit? I do apologise if my responses are not landing fast enough for you. As regards 'admitting', you mean I expressed an opinion? lol

that you agree with him that bitcoin has a good chance to be the world's next reserve currency.

I didn't and he didn't. I said talk to me if/when Bitcoin reaches a trillion dollar market cap. maybe it might be a contender - but pointless spending time talking about it until then. It appears to me that Sharma is taking a similar view. All he is expressing is that in principal, Bitcoin has the potential to fulfil such a role - but until it A. becomes less volatile (which he talked about and he sees as likely) and B. starts to expand market cap.) then I don't see it as a realistic option. That Duke is what I said.

With the leaders of 3 billion people calling it an utterly worthless make-believe and everybody else in authority (except Bukele and whatever dude is in charge of the CAR) saying it has a very good chance of going to zero, that is one heck of an act of faith, on a par with any other cults' fantasies.

China says internet bad. China bans internet. China tries to suppress internet. Internet succeeds in spite of China.
China says Bitcoin bad. China bans Bitcoin. China tries to suppress Bitcoin. <Bitcoin will succeed in spite of China>

Now, last time I checked, there weren't 3 billion people in China. So you seem to be throwing the US in there as well - and maybe the Europeans. So lets talk about that. Has the US banned Bitcoin, Duke? Has "everyone" in authority in the US said Bitcoin is utterly worthless make-believe?
The debate is ongoing on Bitcoin and crypto from a regulatory perspective - practically everywhere - but including the US. And it has a few years to rumble on still. In the US, there are a broad range of opinions - some like Liz Warren who would be the stuff of wet dreams for you on the subject of bitcoin/crypto. There are also a whole host of people 'in authority' who take a view that I've no doubt would turn you apoplectic. People like former CFTC chairman Chris Giancarlo, current SEC commissioner Hester Pierce, Former state treasurer and Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis. That's off the top of my head - there are many others - including a whole list of Congressmen and Senators.
There have been a whole series of hearings in both houses where a whole host of representatives have acknowledged the innovation that is implicated here.

That's in government - we get to the financial world - and there's a longer list.

But misrepresent all of that if you'd like.

that is one heck of an act of faith, on a par with any other cults' fantasies.

lol. Well, when your views are 100% ideological and 0% pragmatic, I'm not surprised you come out with this sort of tripe.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@tecate You are not paying attention. The leaders of China (1.45bn) called it utterly worthless. The leaders of India (1.51bn) called it make-believe. Correction to 3bn - I should have said 2.96bn, apologies. You have thrown in the USA and the EU.
I don't care how many US$bn Ruchir manages; how he can envisage bitcoin becoming the successor to the US$ as the World's reserve currency is simply mind boggling. I suppose there is not a non negligible chance of China, India, USA and EU all nuking each other off the planet, leaving El Sal and CAR standing, I could see bitcoin being the world's reserve currency in that scenario, but would your stash of bitcoin be really much use in that situation?

 

[tecate]

@Duke of Marmalade : India has banned bitcoin, unbanned bitcoin, banned bitcoin, unbanned bitcoin, banned bitcoin, unbanned bitcoin. Probably by the time that I've finished this post, they'll have banned it and unbanned it again. And another thing - you're talking about the comments of the Indian Central Bank!
There isn't a central bank in the world that hasn't come out with bile and vitriol where Bitcoin is concerned. And that's entirely logical. Government is about control - bitcoin is about taking some of that control (where it implicates personal wealth/money), decentralising it and taking it away from government and putting it in the hands of everyone. The default position of most in centralised governance is to be opposed to that (although giving it further thought some may come round to understanding that they wont be able to control it at all if they go up against it or that it can be a force for good...assuming of course that a force for good is seen as a feature - plenty of self serving interests in government).
That's before we get to banks/bankers - because this wave of innovation is going to play havoc with retail banking. And then we get to central bankers - it's completely the opposite to what they're involved with - it shows them up for the incompetent alchemists that they are. How would you possibly expect a central banker to have any good thing to say about Bitcoin? And yet, 95% of the time, it's these academic cronies that you've been depending on - to form your views (you've literally said that whatever view on BTC they express, you will blindly follow).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1492532830328532992

As regards the likes of Sharma managing $95 billion in the private sector, I certainly think it matters. I said I don't think there's much point in talking about Bitcoin as a global reserve currency as it has a world of adoption/development, etc to achieve before that ever becomes a realistic option. But if you want to talk about it, fine. Answer me this - if Bitcoin reached a trillion dollar market cap and if Bitcoin became much less volatile (exactly as Sharma talked about) - in those circumstances, would you still throw your toys out of the pram re. Bitcoin being a global reserve currency?